|
CONVERSATION X.
ON METALS.
MRS. B.
The METALS, which we are now to examine, are bodies of a very different nature from those which we have hitherto considered. They do not, like the bases of gases, elude the immediate observation of our senses; for they are the most brilliant, the most ponderous, and the most palpable substances in nature.
CAROLINE.
I doubt, however, whether the metals will appear to us so interesting, and give us so much entertainment as those mysterious elements which conceal themselves from our view. Besides, they cannot afford so much novelty; they are bodies with which we are already so well acquainted.
MRS. B.
You are not aware, my dear, of the interesting discoveries which were a few years ago made by Sir H. Davy respecting this class of bodies. By the aid of the Voltaic battery, he has obtained from a variety of substances, metals before unknown, the properties of which are equally new and curious. We shall begin, however, by noticing those metals with which you profess to be so well acquainted. But the acquaintance, you will soon perceive, is but very superficial; and I trust that you will find both novelty and entertainment in considering the metals in a chemical point of view. To treat of this subject fully, would require a whole course of lectures; for metals form of themselves a most important branch of practical chemistry. We must, therefore, confine ourselves to a general view of them. These bodies are seldom found naturally in their metallic form: they are generally more or less oxygenated or combined with sulphur, earths, or acids, and are often blended with each other. They are found buried in the bowels of the earth in most parts of the world, but chiefly in mountainous districts, where the surface of the globe has suffered from the earthquakes, volcanos, and other convulsions of nature. They are spread in strata or beds, called veins, and these veins are composed of a certain quantity of metal, combined with various earthy substances, with which they form minerals of different nature and appearance, which are called ores.
CAROLINE.
I now feel quite at home, for my father has a lead-mine in Yorkshire, and I have heard a great deal about veins of ore, and of the roasting and smelting of the lead; but, I confess, that I do not understand in what these operations consist.
MRS. B.
Roasting is the process by which the volatile parts of the ore are evaporated; smelting, that by which the pure metal is afterwards separated from the earthy remains of the ore. This is done by throwing the whole into a furnace, and mixing with it certain substances that will combine with the earthy parts and other foreign ingredients of the ore; the metal being the heaviest, falls to the bottom, and runs out by proper openings in its pure metallic state.
EMILY.
You told us in a preceding lesson that metals had a great affinity for oxygen. Do they not, therefore, combine with oxygen, when strongly heated in the furnace, and run out in the state of oxyds?
MRS. B.
No; for the scoriae, or oxyd, which soon forms on the surface of the fused metal, when it is oxydable, prevents the air from having any further influence on the mass; so that neither combustion nor oxygenation can take place.
CAROLINE.
Are all the metals equally combustible?
MRS. B.
No; their attraction for oxygen varies extremely. There are some that will combine with it only at a very high temperature, or by the assistance of acids; whilst there are others that oxydate spontaneously and with great rapidity, even at the lowest temperature; such is in particular manganese, which scarcely ever exists in the metallic state, as it immediately absorbs oxygen on being exposed to the air, and crumbles to an oxyd in the course of a few hours.
EMILY.
Is not that the oxyd from which you extracted the oxygen gas?
MRS. B.
It is: so that, you see, this metal attracts oxygen at a low temperature, and parts with it when strongly heated.
EMILY.
Is there any other metal that oxydates at the temperature of the atmosphere?
MRS. B.
They all do, more or less, excepting gold, silver, and platina.
Copper, lead, and iron, oxydate slowly in the air, and cover themselves with a sort of rust, a process which depends on the gradual conversion of the surface into an oxyd. This rusty surface preserves the interior metal from oxydation, as it prevents the air from coming in contact with it. Strictly speaking, however, the word rust applies only to the oxyd, which forms on the surface of iron, when exposed to air and moisture, which oxyd appears to be united with a small portion of carbonic acid.
EMILY.
When metals oxydate from the atmosphere without an elevation of temperature, some light and heat, I suppose, must be disengaged, though not in sufficient quantities to be sensible.
MRS. B.
Undoubtedly; and, indeed, it is not surprising that in this case the light and heat should not be sensible, when you consider how extremely slow, and, indeed, how imperfectly, most metals oxydate by mere exposure to the atmosphere. For the quantity of oxygen with which metals are capable of combining, generally depends upon their temperature; and the absorption stops at various points of oxydation, according to the degree to which their temperature is raised.
EMILY.
That seems very natural; for the greater the quantity of caloric introduced into a metal, the more will its positive electricity be exalted, and consequently the stronger will be its affinity for oxygen.
MRS. B.
Certainly. When the metal oxygenates with sufficient rapidity for light and heat to become sensible, combustion actually takes place. But this happens only at very high temperatures, and the product is nevertheless an oxyd; for though, as I have just said, metals will combine with different proportions of oxygen, yet with the exception of only five of them, they are not susceptible of acidification.
Metals change colour during the different degrees of oxydation which they undergo. Lead, when heated in contact with the atmosphere, first becomes grey; if its temperature be then raised, it turns yellow, and a still stronger heat changes it to red. Iron becomes successively a green, brown, and white oxyd. Copper changes from brown to blue, and lastly green.
EMILY.
Pray, is the white lead with which houses are painted prepared by oxydating lead?
MRS. B.
Not merely by oxydating, but by being also united with carbonic acid. It is a carbonat of lead. The mere oxyd of lead is called red lead. Litharge is another oxyd of lead, containing less oxygen. Almost all the metallic oxyds are used as paints. The various sorts of ochres consist chiefly of iron more or less oxydated. And it is a remarkable circumstance, that if you burn metals rapidly, the light or flame they emit during combustion partakes of the colours which the oxyd successively assumes.
CAROLINE.
How is that accounted for, Mrs. B.? For light, you know, does not proceed from the burning body, but from the decomposition of the oxygen gas?
MRS. B.
The correspondence of the colour of the light with that of the oxyd which emits it, is, in all probability, owing to some particles of the metal which are volatilised and carried off by the caloric.
CAROLINE.
It is then a sort of metallic gas.
EMILY.
Why is it reckoned so unwholesome to breathe the air of a place in which metals are melting?
MRS. B.
Perhaps the notion is too generally entertained. But it is true with respect to lead, and some other noxious metals, because, unless care be taken, the particles of the oxyd which are volatilised by the heat are inhaled in with the breath, and may produce dangerous effects.
I must show you some instances of the combustion of metals; it would require the heat of a furnace to make them burn in the common air, but if we supply them with a stream of oxygen gas, we may easily accomplish it.
CAROLINE.
But it will still, I suppose, be necessary in some degree to raise their temperature?
MRS. B.
This, as you shall see, is very easily done, particularly if the experiment be tried upon a small scale. —I begin by lighting this piece of charcoal with the candle, and then increase the rapidity of its combustion by blowing upon it with a blow-pipe. (PLATE XII. fig. 1.)
EMILY.
That I do not understand; for it is not every kind of air, but merely oxygen gas, that produces combustion. Now you said that in breathing we inspired, but did not expire oxygen gas. Why, therefore, should the air which you breathe through the blow-pipe promote the combustion of the charcoal?
MRS. B.
Because the air, which has but once passed through the lungs, is yet but little altered, a small portion only of its oxygen being destroyed; so that a great deal more is gained by increasing the rapidity of the current, by means of the blow-pipe, than is lost in consequence of the air passing once through the lungs, as you shall see—
EMILY.
Yes, indeed, it makes the charcoal burn much brighter.
MRS. B.
Whilst it is red-hot, I shall drop some iron filings on it, and supply them with a current of oxygen gas, by means of this apparatus, (PLATE XII. fig 2.) which consists simply of a closed tin cylindrical vessel, full of oxygen gas, with two apertures and stop-cocks, by one of which a stream of water is thrown into the vessel through a long funnel, whilst by the other the gas is forced out through a blow-pipe adapted to it, as the water gains admittance. —Now that I pour water into the funnel, you may hear the gas issuing from the blow-pipe—I bring the charcoal close to the current, and drop the filings upon it—
CAROLINE.
They emit much the same vivid light as the combustion of the iron wire in oxygen gas.
MRS. B.
The process is, in fact, the same; there is only some difference in the mode of conducting it. Let us burn some tin in the same manner—you see that it is equally combustible. —Let us now try some copper—
CAROLINE.
This burns with a greenish flame; it is, I suppose, owing to the colour of the oxyd?
EMILY.
Pray, shall we not also burn some gold?
MRS. B.
That is not in our power, at least in this way. Gold, silver, and platina, are incapable of being oxydated by the greatest heat that we can produce by the common method. It is from this circumstance, that they have been called perfect metals. Even these, however, have an affinity for oxygen; but their oxydation or combustion can be performed only by means of acids or by electricity. The spark given out by the Voltaic battery produces at the point of contact a greater degree of heat than any other process; and it is at this very high temperature only that the affinity of these metals for oxygen will enable them to act on each other.
I am sorry that I cannot show you the combustion of the perfect metals by this process, but it requires a considerable Voltaic battery. You will see these experiments performed in the most perfect manner, when you attend the chemical lectures of the Royal Institution. But in the mean time I can, without difficulty, show you an ingenious apparatus lately contrived for the purpose of producing intense heats, the power of which nearly equals that of the largest Voltaic batteries. It simply consists, you see, in a strong box, made of iron or copper, (PLATE X. fig. 2.) to which may be adapted this air-syringe or condensing-pump, and a stop-cock terminating in a small orifice similar to that of a blow-pipe. By working the condensing syringe, up and down in this manner, a quantity of air is accumulated in the vessel, which may be increased to almost any extent; so that if we now turn the stop-cock, the condensed air will rush out, forming a jet of considerable force; and if we place the flame of a lamp in the current, you will see how violently the flame is driven in that direction.
CAROLINE.
It seems to be exactly the same effect as that of a blow-pipe worked by the mouth, only much stronger.
EMILY.
Yes; and this new instrument has this additional advantage, that it does not fatigue the mouth and lungs like the common blow-pipe, and requires no art in blowing.
MRS. B.
Unquestionably; but yet this blow-pipe would be of very limited utility, if its energy and power could not be greatly increased by some other contrivance. Can you imagine any mode of producing such an effect?
EMILY.
Could not the reservoir be charged with pure oxygen, instead of common air, as in the case of the gas-holder?
MRS. B.
Undoubtedly; and this is precisely the contrivance I allude to. The vessel need only be supplied with air from a bladder full of oxygen, instead of the air of the room, and this, you see, may be easily done by screwing the bladder on the upper part of the syringe, so that in working the syringe the oxygen gas is forced from the bladder into the condensing vessel.
CAROLINE.
With the aid of this small apparatus, therefore, we could obtain the same effects as those we have just produced with the gas-holder, by means of a column of water forcing the gas out of it?
MRS. B.
Yes; and much more conveniently so. But there is a mode of using this apparatus by which more powerful effects still may be obtained. It consists in condensing in the reservoir, not oxygen alone, but a mixture of oxygen and hydrogen in the exact proportion in which they unite to produce water; and then kindling the jet formed by the mixed gases. The heat disengaged by this combustion, without the help of any lamp, is probably the most intense known; and various effects are said to have been obtained from it which exceed all expectation.
CAROLINE.
But why should we not try this experiment?
MRS. B.
Because it is not exempt from danger; the combustion (notwithstanding various contrivances which have been resorted to with a view to prevent accident) being apt to penetrate into the inside of the vessel, and to produce a dangerous and violent explosion. —We shall, therefore, now proceed in our subject.
CAROLINE.
I think you said the oxyds of metals could be restored to their metallic state?
MRS. B.
Yes; this is called reviving a metal. Metals are in general capable of being revived by charcoal, when heated red hot, charcoal having a greater attraction for oxygen than the metals. You need only, therefore, decompose, or unburn the oxyd, by depriving it of its oxygen, and the metal will be restored to its pure state.
EMILY.
But will the carbon, by this operation, be burnt, and be converted into carbonic acid?
MRS. B.
Certainly. There are other combustible substances to which metals at a high temperature will part with their oxygen. They will also yield it to each other, according to their several degrees of attraction for it; and if the oxygen goes into a more dense state in the metal which it enters, than it existed in that which it quits, a proportional disengagement of caloric will take place.
CAROLINE.
And cannot the oxyds of gold, silver, and platina, which are formed by means of acids or of the electric fluid, be restored to their metallic state?
MRS. B.
Yes, they may; and the intervention of a combustible body is not required; heat alone will take the oxygen from them, convert it into a gas, and revive the metal.
EMILY.
You said that rust was an oxyd of iron; how is it, then, that water, or merely dampness, produces it, which, you know, it very frequently does on steel grates, or any iron instruments?
MRS. B.
In that case the metal decomposes the water, or dampness (which is nothing but water in a state of vapour), and obtains the oxygen from it.
CAROLINE.
I thought that it was necessary to bring metals to a very high temperature to enable them to decompose water.
MRS. B.
It is so, if it is required that the process should be performed rapidly, and if any considerable quantity is to be decomposed. Rust, you knew, is sometimes months in forming, and then it is only the surface of the metal that is oxydated.
EMILY.
Metals, then, that do not rust, are incapable of spontaneous oxydation, either by air or water?
MRS. B.
Yes; and this is the case with the perfect metals, which, on that account, preserve their metallic lustre so well.
EMILY.
Are all metals capable of decomposing water, provided their temperature be sufficiently raised?
MRS. B.
No; a certain degree of attraction is requisite, besides the assistance of heat. Water, you recollect, is composed of oxygen and hydrogen; and, unless the affinity of the metal for oxygen be stronger than that of hydrogen, it is in vain that we raise its temperature, for it cannot take the oxygen from the hydrogen. Iron, zinc, tin, and antimony, have a stronger affinity for oxygen than hydrogen has, therefore these four metals are capable of decomposing water. But hydrogen having an advantage over all the other metals with respect to its affinity for oxygen, it not only withholds its oxygen from them, but is even capable, under certain circumstances, of taking the oxygen from the oxyds of these metals.
EMILY.
I confess that I do not quite understand why hydrogen can take oxygen from those metals that do not decompose water.
CAROLINE.
Now I think I do perfectly. Lead, for instance, will not decompose water, because it has not so strong an attraction for oxygen as hydrogen has. Well, then, suppose the lead to be in a state of oxyd; hydrogen will take the oxygen from the lead, and unite with it to form water, because hydrogen has a stronger attraction for oxygen, than oxygen has for lead; and it is the same with all the other metals which do not decompose water.
EMILY.
I understand your explanation, Caroline, very well; and I imagine that it is because lead cannot decompose water that it is so much employed for pipes for conveying that fluid.
MRS. B.
Certainly; lead is, on that account, particularly appropriate to such purposes; whilst, on the contrary, this metal, if it was oxydable by water, would impart to it very noxious qualities, as all oxyds of lead are more or less pernicious.
But, with regard to the oxydation of metals, the most powerful mode of effecting it is by means of acids. These, you know, contain a much greater proportion of oxygen than either air or water; and will, most of them, easily yield it to metals. Thus, you recollect, the zinc plates of the Voltaic battery are oxydated by the acid and water, much more effectually than by water alone.
CAROLINE.
And I have often observed that if I drop vinegar, lemon, or any acid on the blade of a knife, or on a pair of scissars, it will immediately produce a spot of rust.
EMILY.
Metals have, then, three ways of obtaining oxygen; from the atmosphere, from water, and from acids.
MRS. B.
The two first you have already witnessed, and I shall now show you how metals take the oxygen from an acid. This bottle contains nitric acid; I shall pour some of it over this piece of copper-leaf . . . . . . .
CAROLINE.
Oh, what a disagreeable smell!
EMILY.
And what is it that produces the effervescency and that thick yellow vapour?
MRS. B.
It is the acid, which being abandoned by the greatest part of its oxygen, is converted into a weaker acid, which escapes in the form of gas.
CAROLINE.
And whence proceeds this heat?
MRS. B.
Indeed, Caroline, I think you might now be able to answer that question yourself.
CAROLINE.
Perhaps it is that the oxygen enters into the metal in a more solid state than it existed in the acid, in consequence of which caloric is disengaged.
MRS. B.
If the combination of the oxygen and the metal results from the union of their opposite electricities, of course caloric must be given out.
EMILY.
The effervescence is over; therefore I suppose that the metal is now oxydated.
MRS. B.
Yes. But there is another important connection between metals and acids, with which I must now make you acquainted. Metals, when in the state of oxyds, are capable of being dissolved by acids. In this operation they enter into a chemical combination with the acid, and form an entirely new compound.
CAROLINE.
But what difference is there between the oxydation and the dissolution of the metal by an acid?
MRS. B.
In the first case, the metal merely combines with a portion of oxygen taken from the acid, which is thus partly deoxygenated, as in the instance you have just seen; in the second case, the metal, after being previously oxydated, is actually dissolved in the acid, and enters into a chemical combination with it, without producing any further decomposition or effervescence. —This complete combination of an oxyd and an acid forms a peculiar and important class of compound salts.
EMILY.
The difference between an oxyd and a compound salt, therefore, is very obvious: the one consists of a metal and oxygen; the other of an oxyd and an acid.
MRS. B.
Very well: and you will be careful to remember that the metals are incapable of entering into this combination with acids, unless they are previously oxydated; therefore, whenever you bring a metal in contact with an acid, it will be first oxydated and afterwards dissolved, provided that there be a sufficient quantity of acid for both operations.
There are some metals, however, whose solution is more easily accomplished, by diluting the acid in water; and the metal will, in this case, be oxydated, not by the acid, but by the water, which it will decompose. But in proportion as the oxygen of the water oxydates the surface of the metal, the acid combines with it, washes it off, and leaves a fresh surface for the oxygen to act upon: then other coats of oxyd are successively formed, and rapidly dissolved by the acid, which continues combining with the new-formed surfaces of oxyd till the whole of the metal is dissolved. During this process the hydrogen gas of the water is disengaged, and flies off with effervescence.
EMILY.
Was not this the manner in which the sulphuric acid assisted the iron filings in decomposing water?
MRS. B.
Exactly; and it is thus that several metals, which are incapable alone of decomposing water, are enabled to do it by the assistance of an acid, which, by continually washing off the covering of oxyd, as it is formed, prepares a fresh surface of metal to act upon the water.
CAROLINE.
The acid here seems to act a part not very different from that of a scrubbing-brush. —But pray would not this be a good method of cleaning metallic utensils?
MRS. B.
Yes; on some occasions a weak acid, as vinegar, is used for cleaning copper. Iron plates, too, are freed from the rust on their surface by diluted muriatic acid, previous to their being covered with tin. You must remember, however, that in this mode of cleaning metals the acid should be quickly afterwards wiped off, otherwise it would produce fresh oxyd.
CAROLINE.
Let us watch the dissolution of the copper in the nitric acid; for I am very impatient to see the salt that is to result from it. The mixture is now of a beautiful blue colour; but there is no appearance of the formation of a salt; it seems to be a tedious operation.
MRS. B.
The crystallisation of the salt requires some length of time to be completed; if, however, you are so impatient, I can easily show you a metallic salt already formed.
CAROLINE.
But that would not satisfy my curiosity half so well as one of our own manufacturing.
MRS. B.
It is one of our own preparing that I mean to show you. When we decomposed water a few days since, by the oxydation of iron filings through the assistance of sulphuric acid, in what did the process consist?
CAROLINE.
In proportion as the water yielded its oxygen to the iron, the acid combined with the new-formed oxyd, and the hydrogen escaped alone.
MRS. B.
Very well; the result, therefore, was a compound salt, formed by the combination of sulphuric acid with oxyd of iron. It still remains in the vessel in which the experiment was performed. Fetch it, and we shall examine it.
EMILY.
What a variety of processes the decomposition of water, by a metal and an acid, implies; 1st, the decomposition of the water; 2dly, the oxydation of the metal; and 3dly, the formation of a compound salt.
CAROLINE.
Here it is, Mrs. B. —What beautiful green crystals! But we do not perceive any crystals in the solution of copper in nitrous acid?
MRS. B.
Because the salt is now suspended in the water which the nitrous acid contains, and will remain so till it is deposited in consequence of rest and cooling.
EMILY.
I am surprised that a body so opake as iron can be converted into such transparent crystals.
MRS. B.
It is the union with the acid that produces the transparency; for if the pure metal were melted, and afterwards permitted to cool and crystallise, it would be found just as opake as before.
EMILY.
I do not understand the exact meaning of crystallisation?
MRS. B.
You recollect that when a solid body is dissolved either by water or caloric it is not decomposed; but that its integrant parts are only suspended in the solvent. When the solution is made in water, the integrant particles of the body will, on the water being evaporated, again unite into a solid mass by the force of their mutual attraction. But when the body is dissolved by caloric alone, nothing more is necessary, in order to make its particles reunite, than to reduce its temperature. And, in general, if the solvent, whether water or caloric, be slowly separated by evaporation or by cooling, and care taken that the particles be not agitated during their reunion, they will arrange themselves in regular masses, each individual substance assuming a peculiar form or arrangement; and this is what is called crystallisation.
EMILY.
Crystallisation, therefore, is simply the reunion of the particles of a solid body that has been dissolved in a fluid.
MRS. B.
That is a very good definition of it. But I must not forget to observe, that heat and water may unite their solvent powers; and, in this case, crystallisation may be hastened by cooling, as well as by evaporating the liquid.
CAROLINE.
But if the body dissolved is of a volatile nature, will it not evaporate with the fluid?
MRS. B.
A crystallised body held in solution only by water is scarcely ever so volatile as the fluid itself, and care must be taken to manage the heat so that it may be sufficient to evaporate the water only.
I should not omit also to mention that bodies, in crystallising from their watery solution, always retain a small portion of water, which remains confined in the crystal in a solid form, and does not reappear unless the body loses its crystalline state. This is called the water of crystallisation. But you must observe, that whilst a body may be separated from its solution in water or caloric simply by cooling or by evaporation, an acid can be taken from a metal with which it is combined only by stronger affinities, which produce a decomposition.
EMILY.
Are the perfect metals susceptible of being dissolved and converted into compound salts by acids?
MRS. B.
Gold is acted upon by only one acid, the oxygenated muriatic, a very remarkable acid, which, when in its most concentrated state, dissolves gold or any other metal, by burning them rapidly.
Gold can, it is true, be dissolved likewise by a mixture of two acids, commonly called aqua regia; but this mixed solvent derives that property from containing the peculiar acid which I have just mentioned. Platina is also acted upon by this acid only; silver is dissolved by nitric acid.
CAROLINE.
I think you said that some of the metals might be so strongly oxydated as to become acid?
MRS. B.
There are five metals, arsenic, molybdena, chrome, tungsten, and columbium, which are susceptible of combining with a sufficient quantity of oxygen to be converted into acids.
CAROLINE.
Acids are connected with metals in such a variety of ways, that I am afraid of some confusion in remembering them. —In the first place, acids will yield their oxygen to metals. Secondly, they will combine with them in their state of oxyds, to form compound salts; and lastly, several of the metals are themselves susceptible of acidification.
MRS. B.
Very well; but though metals have so great an affinity for acids, it is not with that class of bodies alone that they will combine. They are most of them, in their simple state, capable of uniting with sulphur, with phosphorus, with carbon, and with each other; these combinations, according to the nomenclature which was explained to you on a former occasion, are called sulphurets, phosphorets, carburets, &c.
The metallic phosphorets offer nothing very remarkable. The sulphurets form the peculiar kind of mineral called pyrites, from which certain kinds of mineral waters, as those of Harrogate, derive their chief chemical properties. In this combination, the sulphur, together with the iron, have so strong an attraction for oxygen, that they obtain it both from the air and from water, and by condensing it in a solid form, produce the heat which raises the temperature of the water in such a remarkable degree.
EMILY.
But if pyrites obtain oxygen from water, that water must suffer a decomposition, and hydrogen gas be evolved.
MRS. B.
That is actually the case in the hot springs alluded to, which give out an extremely fetid gas, composed of hydrogen impregnated with sulphur.
CAROLINE.
If I recollect right, steel and plumbago, which you mentioned in the last lesson, are both carburets of iron?
MRS. B.
Yes; and they are the only carburets of much consequence.
A curious combination of metals has lately very much attracted the attention of the scientific world: I mean the meteoric stones that fall from the atmosphere. They consist principally of native or pure iron, which is never found in that state in the bowels of the earth; and contain also a small quantity of nickel and chrome, a combination likewise new in the mineral kingdom.
These circumstances have led many scientific persons to believe that those substances have fallen from the moon, or some other planet, while others are of opinion either that they are formed in the atmosphere, or are projected into it by some unknown volcano on the surface of our globe.
CAROLINE.
I have heard much of these stones, but I believe many people are of opinion that they are formed on the surface of the earth, and laugh at their pretended celestial origin.
MRS. B.
The fact of their falling is so well ascertained, that I think no person who has at all investigated the subject, can now entertain any doubt of it. Specimens of these stones have been discovered in all parts of the world, and to each of them some tradition or story of its fall has been found connected. And as the analysis of all those specimens affords precisely the same results, there is strong reason to conjecture that they all proceed from the same source. It is to Mr. Howard that philosophers are indebted for having first analysed these stones, and directed their attention to this interesting subject.
CAROLINE.
But pray, Mrs. B., how can solid masses of iron and nickel be formed from the atmosphere, which consists of the two airs, nitrogen and oxygen?
MRS. B.
I really do not see how they could, and think it much more probable that they fall from the moon. —But we must not suffer this digression to take up too much of our time.
The combinations of metals with each other are called alloys; thus brass is an alloy of copper and zinc; bronze, of copper and tin, &c.
EMILY.
And is not pewter also a combination of metal?
MRS. B.
It is. The pewter made in this country is mostly composed of tin, with a very small proportion of zinc and lead.
CAROLINE.
Block-tin is a kind of pewter, I believe?
MRS. B.
Properly speaking, block-tin means tin in blocks, or square massive ingots; but in the sense in which it is used by ignorant workmen, it is iron plated with tin, which renders it more durable, as tin will not so easily rust. Tin alone, however, would be too soft a metal to be worked for common use, and all tin-vessels and utensils are in fact made of plates of iron, thinly coated with tin, which prevents the iron from rusting.
CAROLINE.
Say rather oxydating, Mrs. B. —Rust is a word that should be exploded in chemistry.
MRS. B.
Take care, however, not to introduce the word oxydate, instead of rust, in general conversation; for you would probably not be understood, and you might be suspected of affectation.
Metals differ very much in their affinity for each other; some will not unite at all, others readily combine together, and on this property of metals the art of soldering depends.
EMILY.
What is soldering?
MRS. B.
It is joining two pieces of metal together, by a more fusible metal interposed between them. Thus tin is a solder for lead; brass, gold, or silver, are solder for iron, &c.
CAROLINE.
And is not plating metals something of the same nature?
MRS. B.
In the operation of plating, two metals are united, one being covered with the other, but without the intervention of a third; iron or copper may thus be covered with gold or silver.
EMILY.
Mercury appears to me of a very different nature from the other metals.
MRS. B.
One of its greatest peculiarities is, that it retains a fluid state at the temperature of the atmosphere. All metals are fusible at different degrees of heat, and they have likewise each the property of freezing or becoming solid at a certain fixed temperature. Mercury congeals only at seventy-two degrees below the freezing point.
EMILY.
That is to say, that in order to freeze, it requires a temperature of seventy-two degrees colder than that at which water freezes.
MRS. B.
Exactly so.
CAROLINE.
But is the temperature of the atmosphere ever so low as that?
MRS. B.
Yes, often in Siberia; but happily never in this part of the globe. Here, however, mercury may be congealed by artificial cold; I mean such intense cold as can be produced by some chemical mixtures, or by the rapid evaporation of ether under the air-pump.*
[Footnote *: By a process analogous to that described, page 155. of this volume.]
CAROLINE.
And can mercury be made to boil and evaporate?
MRS. B.
Yes, like any other liquid; only it requires a much greater degree of heat. At the temperature of six hundred degrees, it begins to boil and evaporate like water.
Mercury combines with gold, silver, tin, and with several other metals; and, if mixed with any of them in a sufficient proportion, it penetrates the solid metal, softens it, loses its own fluidity, and forms an amalgam, which is the name given to the combination of any metal with mercury, forming a substance more or less solid, according as the mercury or the other metal predominates.
EMILY.
In the list of metals there are some whose names I have never before heard mentioned.
MRS. B.
Besides those which Sir H. Davy has obtained, there are several that have been recently discovered, whose properties are yet but little known, as for instance, titanium, which was discovered by the Rev. Mr. Gregor, in the tin-mines of Cornwall; columbium or tantalium, which has lately been discovered by Mr. Hatchett; and osmium, iridium, palladium, and rhodium, all of which Dr. Wollaston and Mr. Tennant found mixed in minute quantities with crude platina, and the distinct existence of which they proved by curious and delicate experiments.
CAROLINE.
Arsenic has been mentioned amongst the metals. I had no notion that it belonged to that class of bodies, for I had never seen it but as a powder, and never thought of it but as a most deadly poison.
MRS. B.
In its pure metallic state, I believe, it is not so poisonous; but it has such a great affinity for oxygen, that it absorbs it from the atmosphere at its natural temperature: you have seen it, therefore, only in its state of oxyd, when, from its combination with oxygen, it has acquired its very poisonous properties.
CAROLINE.
Is it possible that oxygen can impart poisonous qualities? That valuable substance which produces light and fire, and which all bodies in nature are so eager to obtain?
MRS. B.
Most of the metallic oxyds are poisonous, and derive this property from their union with oxygen. The white lead, so much used in paint, owes its pernicious effects to oxygen. In general, oxygen, in a concrete state, appears to be particularly destructive in its effects on flesh or any animal matter; and those oxyds are most caustic that have an acrid burning taste, which proceeds from the metal having but a slight affinity for oxygen, and therefore easily yielding it to the flesh, which it corrodes and destroys.
EMILY.
What is the meaning of the word caustic, which you have just used?
MRS. B.
It expresses that property which some bodies possess, of disorganizing and destroying animal matter, by operating a kind of combustion, or at least a chemical decomposition. You must often have heard of caustic used to burn warts, or other animal excrescences; most of these bodies owe their destructive power to the oxygen with which they are combined. The common caustic, called lunar caustic, is a compound formed by the union of nitric acid and silver; and it is supposed to owe its caustic qualities to the oxygen contained in the nitric acid.
CAROLINE.
But, pray, are not acids still more caustic than oxyds, as they contain a greater proportion of oxygen?
MRS. B.
Some of the acids are; but the caustic property of a body depends not only upon the quantity of oxygen which it contains, but also upon its slight affinity for that principle, and the consequent facility with which it yields it.
EMILY.
Is not this destructive property of oxygen accounted for?
MRS. B.
It proceeds probably from the strong attraction of oxygen for hydrogen; for if the one rapidly absorb the other from the animal fibre, a disorganisation of the substance must ensue.
EMILY.
Caustics are, then, very properly said to burn the flesh, since the combination of oxygen and hydrogen is an actual combustion.
CAROLINE.
Now, I think, this effect would be more properly termed an oxydation, as there is no disengagement of light and heat.
MRS. B.
But there really is a sensation of heat produced by the action of caustics.
EMILY.
If oxygen is so caustic, why does not that which is contained in the atmosphere burn us?
MRS. B.
Because it is in a gaseous state, and has a greater attraction for its electricity than for the hydrogen of our bodies. Besides, should the air be slightly caustic, we are in a great measure sheltered from its effects by the skin; you know how much a wound, however trifling, smarts on being exposed to it.
CAROLINE.
It is a curious idea, however, that we should live in a slow fire. But, if the air was caustic, would it not have an acrid taste?
MRS. B.
It possibly may have such a taste; though in so slight a degree, that custom has rendered it insensible.
CAROLINE.
And why is not water caustic? When I dip my hand into water, though cold, it ought to burn me from the caustic nature of its oxygen.
MRS. B.
Your hand does not decompose the water; the oxygen in that state is much better supplied with hydrogen than it would be by animal matter, and if its causticity depend on its affinity for that principle, it will be very far from quitting its state of water to act upon your hand. You must not forget that oxyds are caustic in proportion as the oxygen adheres slightly to them.
EMILY.
Since the oxyd of arsenic is poisonous, its acid, I suppose, is fully as much so?
MRS. B.
Yes; it is one of the strongest poisons in nature.
EMILY.
There is a poison called verdigris, which forms on brass and copper when not kept very clean; and this, I have heard, is an objection to these metals being made into kitchen utensils. Is this poison likewise occasioned by oxygen?
MRS. B.
It is produced by the intervention of oxygen; for verdigris is a compound salt formed by the union of vinegar and copper; it is of a beautiful green colour, and much used in painting.
EMILY.
But, I believe, verdigris is often formed on copper when no vinegar has been in contact with it.
MRS. B.
Not real verdigris, but compound salts, somewhat resembling it, may be produced by the action of any acid on copper.
The solution of copper in nitric acid, if evaporated, affords a salt which produces an effect on tin that will surprise you, and I have prepared some from the solution we made before, that I might show it to you. I shall first sprinkle some water on this piece of tin-foil, and then some of the salt. —Now observe that I fold it up suddenly, and press it into one lump.
CAROLINE.
What a prodigious vapour issues from it—and sparks of fire I declare!
MRS. B.
I thought it would surprise you. The effect, however, I dare say you could account for, since it is merely the consequence of the oxygen of the salt rapidly entering into a closer combination with the tin.
There is also a beautiful green salt too curious to be omitted; it is produced by the combination of cobalt with muriatic acid, which has the singular property of forming what is called sympathetic ink. Characters written with this solution are invisible when cold, but when a gentle heat is applied, they assume a fine bluish green colour.
CAROLINE.
I think one might draw very curious landscapes with the assistance of this ink; I would first make a water-colour drawing of a winter-scene, in which the trees should be leafless, and the grass scarcely green: I would then trace all the verdure with the invisible ink, and whenever I chose to create spring, I should hold it before the fire, and its warmth would cover the landscape with a rich verdure.
MRS. B.
That will be a very amusing experiment, and I advise you by all means to try it.
[Transcriber's Note: Several cobalt compounds, including the cobalt chloride described here, are still in use as invisible ("sympathetic") inks. They are safe if used appropriately.]
Before we part, I must introduce to your acquaintance the curious metals which Sir H. Davy has recently discovered. The history of these extraordinary bodies is yet so much in its infancy, that I shall confine myself to a very short account of them; it is more important to point out to you the vast, and apparently inexhaustible, field of research which has been thrown open to our view by Sir H. Davy's memorable discoveries, than to enter into a minute account of particular bodies or experiments.
CAROLINE.
But I have heard that these discoveries, however splendid and extraordinary, are not very likely to prove of any great benefit to the world, as they are rather objects of curiosity than of use.
MRS. B.
Such may be the illiberal conclusions of the ignorant and narrow-minded; but those who can duly estimate the advantages of enlarging the sphere of science, must be convinced that the acquisition of every new fact, however unconnected it may at first appear with practical utility, must ultimately prove beneficial to mankind. But these remarks are scarcely applicable to the present subject; for some of the new metals have already proved eminently useful as chemical agents, and are likely soon to be employed in the arts. For the enumeration of these metals, I must refer you to our list of simple bodies; they are derived from the alkalies, the earths, and three of the acids, all of which had been hitherto considered as undecompoundable or simple bodies.
When Sir H. Davy first turned his attention to the effects of the Voltaic battery, he tried its power on a variety of compound bodies, and gradually brought to light a number of new and interesting facts, which led the way to more important discoveries. It would be highly interesting to trace his steps in this new department of science, but it would lead us too far from our principal object. A general view of his most remarkable discoveries is all that I can aim at, or that you could, at present, understand.
The facility with which compound bodies yielded to the Voltaic electricity, induced him to make trial of its effects on substances hitherto considered as simple, but which he suspected of being compound, and his researches were soon crowned with the most complete success.
The body which he first submitted to the Voltaic battery, and which had never yet been decomposed, was one of the fixed alkalies, called potash. This substance gave out an elastic fluid at the positive wire, which was ascertained to be oxygen, and at the negative wire, small globules of a very high metallic lustre, very similar in appearance to mercury; thus proving that potash, which had hitherto been considered as a simple incombustible body, was in fact a metallic oxyd; and that its incombustibility proceeded from its being already combined with oxygen.
EMILY.
I suppose the wires used in this experiment were of platina, as they were when you decomposed water; for if of iron, the oxygen would have combined with the wire, instead of appearing in the form of gas.
MRS. B.
Certainly: the metal, however, would equally have been disengaged. Sir H. Davy has distinguished this new substance by the name of POTASSIUM, which is derived from that of the alkali, from which it is procured. I have some small pieces of it in this phial, but you have already seen it, as it is the metal which we burnt in contact with sulphur.
EMILY.
What is the liquid in which you keep it?
MRS. B.
It is naptha, a bituminous liquid, with which I shall hereafter make you acquainted. It is almost the only fluid in which potassium can be preserved, as it contains no oxygen, and this metal has so powerful an attraction for oxygen, that it will not only absorb it from the air, but likewise from water, or any body whatever that contains it.
EMILY.
This, then, is one of the bodies that oxydates spontaneously without the application of heat?
MRS. B.
Yes; and it has this remarkable peculiarity that it attracts oxygen much more rapidly from water than from air; so that when thrown into water, however cold, it actually bursts into flame. I shall now throw a small piece, about the size of a pin's head, on this drop of water.
CAROLINE.
It instantaneously exploded, producing a little flash of light! this is, indeed, a most curious substance!
MRS. B.
By its combustion it is reconverted into potash; and as potash is now decidedly a compound body, I shall not enter into any of its properties till we have completed our review of the simple bodies; but we may here make a few observations on its basis, potassium. If this substance is left in contact with air, it rapidly returns to the state of potash, with a disengagement of heat, but without any flash of light.
EMILY.
But is it not very singular that it should burn better in water than in air?
CAROLINE.
I do not think so: for if the attraction of potassium for oxygen is so strong that it finds no more difficulty in separating it from the hydrogen in water, than in absorbing it from the air, it will no doubt be more amply and rapidly supplied by water than by air.
MRS. B.
That cannot, however, be precisely the reason, for when potassium is introduced under water, without contact of air, the combustion is not so rapid, and indeed, in that case, there is no luminous appearance; but a violent action takes place, much heat is excited, the potash is regenerated, and hydrogen gas is evolved.
Potassium is so eminently combustible, that instead of requiring, like other metals, an elevation of temperature, it will burn rapidly in contact with water, even below the freezing point. This you may witness by throwing a piece on this lump of ice.
CAROLINE.
It again exploded with flame, and has made a deep hole in the ice.
MRS. B.
This hole contains a solution of potash; for the alkali being extremely soluble, disappears in the water at the instant it is produced. Its presence, however, may be easily ascertained, alkalies having the property of changing paper, stained with turmeric, to a red colour; if you dip one end of this slip of paper into the hole in the ice you will see it change colour, and the same, if you wet it with the drop of water in which the first piece of potassium was burnt.
CAROLINE.
It has indeed changed the paper from yellow to red.
MRS. B.
This metal will burn likewise in carbonic acid gas, a gas that had always been supposed incapable of supporting combustion, as we were unacquainted with any substance that had a greater attraction for oxygen than carbon. Potassium, however, readily decomposes this gas, by absorbing its oxygen, as I shall show you. This retort is filled with carbonic acid gas. —I will put a small piece of potassium in it; but for this combustion a slight elevation of temperature is required, for which purpose I shall hold the retort over the lamp.
CAROLINE.
Now it has taken fire, and burns with violence! It has burst the retort.
MRS. B.
Here is the piece of regenerated potash; can you tell me why it is become so black?
EMILY.
No doubt it is blackened by the carbon, which, when its oxygen entered into combination with the potassium, was deposited on its surface.
MRS. B.
You are right. This metal is perfectly fluid at the temperature of one hundred degrees; at fifty degrees it is solid, but soft and malleable; at thirty-two degrees it is hard and brittle, and its fracture exhibits an appearance of confused crystallization. It is scarcely more than half as heavy as water; its specific gravity being about six when water is reckoned at ten; so that this metal is actually lighter than any known fluid, even than ether.
Potassium combines with sulphur and phosphorus, forming sulphurets and phosphurets; it likewise forms alloys with several metals, and amalgamates with mercury.
EMILY.
But can a sufficient quantity of potassium be obtained, by means of the Voltaic battery, to admit of all its properties and relations to other bodies being satisfactorily ascertained?
MRS. B.
Not easily; but I must not neglect to inform you that a method of obtaining this metal in considerable quantities has since been discovered. Two eminent French chemists, Thenard and Gay Lussac, stimulated by the triumph which Sir H. Davy had obtained, attempted to separate potassium from its combination with oxygen, by common chemical means, and without the aid of electricity. They caused red hot potash in a state of fusion to filter through iron turnings in an iron tube, heated to whiteness. Their experiment was crowned with the most complete success; more potassium was obtained by this single operation, that could have been collected in many weeks by the most diligent use of the Voltaic battery.
EMILY.
In this experiment, I suppose, the oxygen quitted its combination with the potassium to unite with the iron turnings?
MRS. B.
Exactly so; and the potassium was thus obtained in its simple state. From that time it has become a most convenient and powerful instrument of deoxygenation in chemical experiments. This important improvement, engrafted on Sir H. Davy's previous discoveries, served but to add to his glory, since the facts which he had established, when possessed of only a few atoms of this curious substance, and the accuracy of his analytical statements, were all confirmed when an opportunity occurred of repeating his experiments upon this substance, which can now be obtained in unlimited quantities.
CAROLINE.
What a satisfaction Sir H. Davy must have felt, when by an effort of genius he succeeded in bringing to light and actually giving existence, to these curious bodies, which without him might perhaps have ever remained concealed from our view!
MRS. B.
The next substance which Sir H. Davy submitted to the influence of the Voltaic battery was Soda, the other fixed alkali, which yielded to the same powers of decomposition; from this alkali too, a metallic substance was obtained, very analogous in its properties to that which had been discovered in potash; Sir H. Davy has called it SODIUM. It is rather heavier than potassium, though considerably lighter than water; it is not so easily fusible as potassium.
Encouraged by these extraordinary results, Sir H. Davy next performed a series of beautiful experiments on Ammonia, or the volatile alkali, which, from analogy, he was led to suspect might also contain oxygen. This he soon ascertained to be the fact, but he has not yet succeeded in obtaining the basis of ammonia in a separate state; it is from analogy, and from the power which the volatile alkali has, in its gaseous form, to oxydate iron, and also from the amalgams which can be obtained from ammonia by various processes, that the proofs of that alkali being also a metallic oxyd are deduced.
Thus, then, the three alkalies, two of which had always been considered as simple bodies, have now lost all claim to that title, and I have accordingly classed the alkalies amongst the compounds, whose properties we shall treat of in a future conversation.
EMILY.
What are the other newly discovered metals which you have alluded to in your list of simple bodies?
MRS. B.
They are the metals of the earths which became next the object of Sir H. Davy's researches; these bodies had never yet been decomposed, though they were strongly suspected not only of being compounds, but of being metallic oxyds. From the circumstance of their incombustibility it was conjectured, with some plausibility, that they might possibly be bodies that had been already burnt.
CAROLINE.
And metals, when oxydated, become, to all appearance, a kind of earthy substance.
MRS. B.
They have, besides, several features of resemblance with metallic oxyds; Sir H. Davy had therefore great reason to be sanguine in his expectations of decomposing them, and he was not disappointed. He could not, however, succeed in obtaining the basis of the earths in a pure separate state; but metallic alloys were formed with other metals, which sufficiently proved the existence of the metallic basis of the earths.
The last class of new metallic bodies which Sir H. Davy discovered was obtained from the three undecompounded acids, the boracic, the fluoric, and the muriatic acids; but as you are entirely unacquainted with these bodies, I shall reserve the account of their decomposition till we come to treat of their properties as acids.
Thus in the course of two years, by the unparalleled exertions of a single individual, chemical science has assumed a new aspect. Bodies have been brought to light which the human eye never before beheld, and which might have remained eternally concealed under their impenetrable disguise.
It is impossible at the present period to appreciate to their full extent the consequences which science or the arts may derive from these discoveries; we may, however, anticipate the most important results.
In chemical analysis we are now in possession of more energetic agents of decomposition than were ever before known.
In geology new views are opened, which will probably operate a revolution in that obscure and difficult science. It is already proved that all the earths, and, in fact, the solid surface of this globe, are metallic bodies mineralized by oxygen, and as our planet has been calculated to be considerably more dense upon the whole than on the surface, it is reasonable to suppose that the interior part is composed of a metallic mass, the surface of which only has been mineralized by the atmosphere.
The eruptions of volcanos, those stupendous problems of nature, admit now of an easy explanation. For if the bowels of the earth are the grand recess of these newly discovered inflammable bodies, whenever water penetrates into them, combustions and explosions must take place; and it is remarkable that the lava which is thrown out, is the very kind of substance which might be expected to result from these combustions.
I must now take my leave of you; we have had a very long conversation to-day, and I hope you will be able to recollect what you have learnt. At our next interview we shall enter on a new subject.
END OF THE FIRST VOLUME.
Printed by A. Strahan, Printers-Street, London.
* * * * * * * * *
CONVERSATIONS ON CHEMISTRY;
In Which The Elements Of That Science Are Familiarly Explained And Illustrated By Experiments.
IN TWO VOLUMES.
The Fifth Edition, revised, corrected, and considerably enlarged.
VOL. II. ON COMPOUND BODIES.
London: Printed For Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme, and Brown, Paternoster-Row. 1817.
CONVERSATION XIII.
ON THE ATTRACTION OF COMPOSITION.
MRS. B.
Having completed our examination of the simple or elementary bodies, we are now to proceed to those of a compound nature; but before we enter on this extensive subject, it will be necessary to make you acquainted with the principal laws by which chemical combinations are governed.
You recollect, I hope, what we formerly said of the nature of the attraction of composition, or chemical attraction, or affinity, as it is also called?
EMILY.
Yes, I think perfectly; it is the attraction that subsists between bodies of a different nature, which occasions them to combine and form a compound, when they come in contact, and, according to Sir H. Davy's opinion, this effect is produced by the attraction of the opposite electricities, which prevail in bodies of different kinds.
MRS. B.
Very well; your definition comprehends the first law of chemical attraction, which is, that it takes place only between bodies of a different nature; as, for instance, between an acid and an alkali; between oxygen and a metal, &c.
CAROLINE.
That we understand of course; for the attraction between particles of a similar nature is that of aggregation, or cohesion, which is independent of any chemical power.
MRS. B.
The 2d law of chemical attraction is, that it takes place only between the most minute particles of bodies; therefore, the more you divide the particles of the bodies to be combined, the more readily they act upon each other.
CAROLINE.
That is again a circumstance which we might have supposed, for the finer the particles of the two substances are, the more easily and perfectly they will come in contact with each other, which must greatly facilitate their union. It was for this purpose, you said, that you used iron filings, in preference to wires or pieces of iron, for the decomposition of water.
MRS. B.
It was once supposed that no mechanical power could divide bodies into particles sufficiently minute for them to act on each other; and that, in order to produce the extreme division requisite for a chemical action, one, if not both of the bodies, should be in a fluid state. There are, however, a few instances in which two solid bodies, very finely pulverized, exert a chemical action on one another; but such exceptions to the general rule are very rare indeed.
EMILY.
In all the combinations that we have hitherto seen, one of the constituents has, I believe, been either liquid or aeriform. In combustions, for instance, the oxygen is taken from the atmosphere, in which it existed in the state of gas; and whenever we have seen acids combine with metals or with alkalies, they were either in a liquid or an aeriform state.
MRS. B.
The 3d law of chemical attraction is, that it can take place between two, three, four, or even a greater number of bodies.
CAROLINE.
Oxyds and acids are bodies composed of two constituents; but I recollect no instance of the combination of a greater number of principles.
MRS. B.
The compound salts, formed by the union of the metals with acids, are composed of three principles. And there are salts formed by the combination of the alkalies with the earths which are of a similar description.
CAROLINE.
Are they of the same kind as the metallic salts?
MRS. B.
Yes; they are very analogous in their nature, although different in many of their properties.
A methodical nomenclature, similar to that of the acids, has been adopted for the compound salts. Each individual salt derives its name from its constituent parts, so that every name implies a knowledge of the composition of the salt.
The three alkalies, the alkaline earths, and the metals, are called salifiable bases or radicals; and the acids, salifying principles. The name of each salt is composed both of that of the acid and the salifiable base; and it terminates in at or it, according to the degree of the oxygenation of the acid. Thus, for instance, all those salts which are formed by the combination of the sulphuric acid with any of the salifiable bases are called sulphats, and the name of the radical is added for the specific distinction of the salt; if it be potash, it will compose a sulphat of potash; if ammonia, sulphat of ammonia, &c.
EMILY.
The crystals which we obtained from the combination of iron and sulphuric acid were therefore sulphat of iron?
MRS. B.
Precisely; and those which we prepared by dissolving copper in nitric acid, nitrat of copper, and so on. —But this is not all; if the salt be formed by that class of acids which ends in ous, (which you know indicates a less degree of oxygenation,) the termination of the name of the salt will be in it, as sulphit of potash, sulphit of ammonia, &c.
EMILY.
There must be an immense number of compound salts, since there is so great a variety of salifiable radicals, as well as of salifying principles.
MRS. B.
Their real number cannot be ascertained, since it increases every day. But we must not proceed further in the investigation of the compound salts, until we have completed the examination of the nature of the ingredients of which they are composed.
The 4th law of chemical attraction is, that a change of temperature always takes place at the moment of combination. This arises from the extrication of the two electricities in the form of caloric, which takes place when bodies unite; and also sometimes in part from a change of capacity of the bodies for heat, which always takes place when the combination is attended with an increase of density, but more especially when the compound passes from the liquid to the solid form. I shall now show you a striking instance of a change of temperature from chemical union, merely by pouring some nitrous acid on this small quantity of oil of turpentine—the oil will instantly combine with the oxygen of the acid, and produce a considerable change of temperature.
CAROLINE.
What a blaze! The temperature of the oil and the acid must be greatly raised, indeed, to produce such a violent combustion.
MRS. B.
There is, however, a peculiarity in this combustion, which is, that the oxygen, instead of being derived from the atmosphere alone, is principally supplied by the acid itself.
EMILY.
And are not all combustions instances of the change of temperature produced by the chemical combination of two bodies?
MRS. B.
Undoubtedly; when oxygen loses its gaseous form, in order to combine with a solid body, it becomes condensed, and the caloric evolved produces the elevation of temperature. The specific gravity of bodies is at the same time altered by chemical combination; for in consequence of a change of capacity for heat, a change of density must be produced.
CAROLINE.
That was the case with the sulphuric acid and water, which, by being mixed together, gave out a great deal of heat, and increased in density.
MRS. B.
The 5th law of chemical attraction is, that the properties which characterise bodies, when separate, are altered or destroyed by their combination.
CAROLINE.
Certainly; what, for instance, can be so different from water as the hydrogen and oxygen gases?
EMILY.
Or what more unlike sulphat of iron than iron or sulphuric acid?
MRS. B.
Every chemical combination is an illustration of this rule. But let us proceed—
The 6th law is, that the force of chemical affinity between the constituents of a body is estimated by that which is required for their separation. This force is not always proportional to the facility with which bodies unite; for manganese, for instance, which, you know, is so much disposed to unite with oxygen that it is never found in a metallic state, yields it more easily than any other metal.
EMILY.
But, Mrs. B., you speak of estimating the force of attraction between bodies, by the force required to separate them; how can you measure these forces?
MRS. B.
They cannot be precisely measured, but they are comparatively ascertained by experiment, and can be represented by numbers which express the relative degrees of attraction.
The 7th law is, that bodies have amongst themselves different degrees of attraction. Upon this law, (which you may have discovered yourselves long since,) the whole science of chemistry depends; for it is by means of the various degrees of affinity which bodies have for each other, that all the chemical compositions and decompositions are effected. Every chemical fact or experiment is an instance of the same kind; and whenever the decomposition of a body is performed by the addition of any single new substance, it is said to be effected by simple elective attractions. But it often happens that no simple substance will decompose a body, and that, in order to effect this, you must offer to the compound a body which is itself composed of two, or sometimes three principles, which would not, each separately, perform the decomposition. In this case there are two new compounds formed in consequence of a reciprocal decomposition and recomposition. All instances of this kind are called double elective attractions.
CAROLINE.
I confess I do not understand this clearly.
MRS. B.
You will easily comprehend it by the assistance of this diagram, in which the reciprocal forces of attraction are represented by numbers:
Original Compound Sulphat of Soda.
Soda 8 Sulphuric Acid
Quies- cent Result Result Nitrat 7 Divellent Attractions 6} 13 Sulphat of Soda of Lime Attrac- tions
Nitric Acid 4 Lime — 12
Original Compound Nitrat of Lime.
We here suppose that we are to decompose sulphat of soda; that is, to separate the acid from the alkali; if, for this purpose, we add some lime, in order to make it combine with the acid, we shall fail in our attempt, because the soda and the sulphuric acid attract each other by a force which is superior, and (by way of supposition) is represented by the number 8; while the lime tends to unite with this acid by an affinity equal only to the number 6. It is plain, therefore, that the sulphat of soda will not be decomposed, since a force equal to 8 cannot be overcome by a force equal only to 6.
CAROLINE.
So far, this appears very clear.
MRS. B.
If, on the other hand, we endeavour to decompose this salt by nitric acid, which tends to combine with soda, we shall be equally unsuccessful, as nitric acid tends to unite with the alkali by a force equal only to 7.
In neither of these cases of simple elective attraction, therefore, can we accomplish our purpose. But let us previously combine together the lime and nitric acid, so as to form a nitrat of lime, a compound salt, the constituents of which are united by a power equal to 4. If then we present this compound to the sulphat of soda, a decomposition will ensue, because the sum of the forces which tend to preserve the two salts in their actual state is not equal to that of the forces which tend to decompose them, and to form new combinations. The nitric acid, therefore, will combine with the soda, and the sulphuric acid with the lime.
CAROLINE.
I understand you now very well. This double effect takes place because the numbers 8 and 4, which represent the degrees of attraction of the constituents of the two original salts, make a sum less than the numbers 7 and 6, which represent the degrees of attraction of the two new compounds that will in consequence be formed.
MRS. B.
Precisely so.
CAROLINE.
But what is the meaning of quiescent and divellent forces, which are written in the diagram?
MRS. B.
Quiescent forces are those which tend to preserve compounds in a state of rest, or such as they actually are: divellent forces, those which tend to destroy that state of combination, and to form new compounds.
These are the principal circumstances relative to the doctrine of chemical attractions, which have been laid down as rules by modern chemists; a few others might be mentioned respecting the same theory, but of less importance, and such as would take us too far from our plan. I should, however, not omit to mention that Mr. Berthollet, a celebrated French chemist, has questioned the uniform operation of elective attraction, and has advanced the opinion, that, in chemical combinations, the changes which take place depend not only upon the affinities, but also, in some degree, on the respective quantities of the substances concerned, on the heat applied during the process, and some other circumstances.
CAROLINE.
In that case, I suppose, there would hardly be two compounds exactly similar, though composed of the same materials?
MRS. B.
On the contrary, it is found that a remarkable uniformity prevails, as to proportions, between the ingredients of bodies of similar composition. Thus water, as you may recollect to have seen in a former conversation, is composed of two volumes of hydrogen gas to one of oxygen, and this is always found to be precisely the proportion of its constituents, from whatever source the water be derived. The same uniformity prevails with regard to the various salts; the acid and alkali, in each kind of salt, being always found to combine in the same proportions. Sometimes, it is true, the same acid, and the same alkali, are capable of making two distinct kinds of salts; but in all these cases it is found that one of the salts contains just twice, or in some instances, thrice as much acid, or alkali, as the other.
EMILY.
If the proportions in which bodies combine are so constant and so well defined, how can Mr. Berthollet's remark be reconciled with this uniform system of combination?
MRS. B.
Great as that philosopher's authority is in chemistry, it is now generally supposed that his doubts on this subject were in a great degree groundless, and that the exceptions he has observed in the laws of definite proportions, have been only apparent, and may be accounted for consistently with those laws.
CAROLINE.
Pray, Mrs. B., can you decompose a salt by means of electricity, in the same way as we decompose water?
MRS. B.
Undoubtedly; and I am glad this question occurred to you, because it gives me an opportunity of showing you some very interesting experiments on the subject.
If we dissolve a quantity, however small, of any salt in a glass of water, and if we plunge into it the extremities of the wires which proceed from the two ends of the Voltaic battery, the salt will be gradually decomposed, the acid being attracted by the positive, and the alkali by the negative wire.
EMILY.
But how can you render that decomposition perceptible?
MRS. B.
By placing in contact with the extremities of each wire, in the solution, pieces of paper stained with certain vegetable colours, which are altered by the contact of an acid or an alkali. Thus this blue vegetable preparation called litmus becomes red when touched by an acid; and the juice of violets becomes green by the contact of an alkali.
But the experiment can be made in a much more distinct manner, by receiving the extremities of the wires into two different vessels, so that the alkali shall appear in one vessel and the acid in the other.
CAROLINE.
But then the Voltaic circle will not be completed; how can any effect be produced?
MRS. B.
You are right; I ought to have added that the two vessels must be connected together by some interposed substance capable of conducting electricity. A piece of moistened cotton-wick answers this purpose very well. You see that the cotton (PLATE XIII. fig. 2. c.) has one end immersed in one glass and the other end in the other, so as to establish a communication between any fluids contained in them. We shall now put into each of the glasses a little glauber salt, or sulphat of soda, (which consists of an acid and an alkali,) and then we shall fill the glasses with water, which will dissolve the salt. Let us now connect the glasses by means of the wires (e, d,) with the two ends of the battery, thus . . . .
CAROLINE.
The wires are already giving out small bubbles; is this owing to the decomposition of the salt?
MRS. B.
No; these are bubbles produced by the decomposition of the water, as you saw in a former experiment. In order to render the separation of the acid from the alkali visible, I pour into the glass (a), which is connected with the positive wire, a few drops of a solution of litmus, which the least quantity of acid turns red; and into the other glass (b), which is connected with the negative wire, I pour a few drops of the juice of violets . . . .
EMILY.
The blue solution is already turning red all round the wire.
CAROLINE.
And the violet solution is beginning to turn green. This is indeed very singular!
MRS. B.
You will be still more astonished when we vary the experiment in this manner:— These three glasses (fig. 3. f, g, h,) are, as in the former instance, connected together by wetted cotton, but the middle one alone contains a saline solution, the two others containing only distilled water, coloured as before by vegetable infusions. Yet, on making the connection with the battery, the alkali will appear in the negative glass (h), and the acid in the positive glass (f), though neither of them contained any saline matter.
EMILY.
So that the acid and alkali must be conveyed right and left from the central glass, into the other glasses, by means of the connecting moistened cotton?
MRS. B.
Exactly so; and you may render the experiment still more striking, by putting into the central glass (k, fig. 3.) an alkaline solution, the glauber salt being placed into the negative glass (l), and the positive glass (i) containing only water. The acid will be attracted by the positive wire (m), and will actually appear in the vessel (i), after passing through the alkaline solution (k), without combining with it, although, you know, acids and alkalies are so much disposed to combine. —But this conversation has already much exceeded our usual limits, and we cannot enlarge more upon this interesting subject at present.
CONVERSATION XIV.
ON ALKALIES.
MRS. B.
Having now given you some idea of the laws by which chemical attractions are governed, we may proceed to the examination of bodies which are formed in consequence of these attractions.
The first class of compounds that present themselves to our notice, in our gradual ascent to the most complicated combinations, are bodies composed of only two principles. The sulphurets, phosphurets, carburets, &c. are of this description; but the most numerous and important of these compounds are the combinations of oxygen with the various simple substances with which it has a tendency to unite. Of these you have already acquired some knowledge, but it will be necessary to enter into further particulars respecting the nature and properties of those most deserving our notice. Of this class are the ALKALIES and the EARTHS, which we shall successively examine.
We shall first take a view of the alkalies, of which there are three, viz. POTASH, SODA, and AMMONIA. The two first are called fixed alkalies, because they exist in a solid form at the temperature of the atmosphere, and require a great heat to be volatilised. They consist, as you already know, of metallic bases combined with oxygen. In potash, the proportions are about eighty-six parts of potassium to fourteen of oxygen; and in soda, seventy-seven parts of sodium to twenty-three of oxygen. The third alkali, ammonia, has been distinguished by the name of volatile alkali, because its natural form is that of gas. Its composition is of a more complicated nature, of which we shall speak hereafter.
Some of the earths bear so strong a resemblance in their properties to the alkalies, that it is difficult to know under which head to place them. The celebrated French chemist, Fourcroy, has classed two of them (barytes and strontites) with the alkalies; but as lime and magnesia have almost an equal title to that rank, I think it better not to separate them, and therefore have adopted the common method of classing them with the earths, and of distinguishing them by the name of alkaline earths.
The general properties of alkalies are, an acrid burning taste, a pungent smell, and a caustic action on the skin and flesh.
CAROLINE.
I wonder they should be caustic, Mrs. B., since they contain so little oxygen.
MRS. B.
Whatever substance has an affinity for any one of the constituents of animal matter, sufficiently powerful to decompose it, is entitled to the appellation of caustic. The alkalies, in their pure state, have a very strong attraction for water, for hydrogen, and for carbon, which, you know, are the constituent principles of oil, and it is chiefly by absorbing these substances from animal matter that they effect its decomposition; for, when diluted with a sufficient quantity of water, or combined with any oily substance, they lose their causticity.
But, to return to the general properties of alkalies—they change, as we have already seen, the colour of syrup of violets, and other blue vegetable infusions, to green; and have, in general, a very great tendency to unite with acids, although the respective qualities of these two classes of bodies form a remarkable contrast.
We shall examine the result of the combination of acids and alkalies more particularly hereafter. It will be sufficient at present to inform you, that whenever acids are brought in contact with alkalies, or alkaline earths, they unite with a remarkable eagerness, and form compounds perfectly different from either of their constituents; these bodies are called neutral or compound salts.
The dry white powder which you see in this phial is pure caustic POTASH; it is very difficult to preserve it in this state, as it attracts, with extreme avidity, the moisture from the atmosphere, and if the air were not perfectly excluded, it would, in a very short time, be actually melted.
EMILY.
It is then, I suppose, always found in a liquid state?
MRS. B.
No; it exists in nature in a great variety of forms and combinations, but is never found in its pure separate state; it is combined with carbonic acid, with which it exists in every part of the vegetable kingdom, and is most commonly obtained from the ashes of vegetables, which are the residue that remains after all the other parts have been volatilised by combustion.
CAROLINE.
But you once said, that after all the volatile parts of a vegetable were evaporated, the substance that remained was charcoal?
MRS. B.
I am surprised that you should still confound the processes of volatilisation and combustion. In order to procure charcoal, we evaporate such parts as can be reduced to vapour by the operation of heat alone; but when we burn the vegetable, we burn the carbon also, and convert it into carbonic acid gas.
CAROLINE.
That is true; I hope I shall make no more mistakes in my favourite theory of combustion.
MRS. B.
Potash derives its name from the pots in which the vegetables, from which it was obtained, used formerly to be burnt; the alkali remained mixed with the ashes at the bottom, and was thence called potash.
EMILY.
The ashes of a wood-fire, then, are potash, since they are vegetable ashes?
MRS. B.
They always contain more or less potash, but are very far from consisting of that substance alone, as they are a mixture of various earths and salts which remain after the combustion of vegetables, and from which it is not easy to separate the alkali in its pure form. The process by which potash is obtained, even in the imperfect state in which it is used in the arts, is much more complicated than simple combustion. It was once deemed impossible to separate it entirely from all foreign substances, and it is only in chemical laboratories that it is to be met with in the state of purity in which you find it in this phial. Wood-ashes are, however, valuable for the alkali which they contain, and are used for some purposes without any further preparation. Purified in a certain degree, they make what is commonly called pearlash, which is of great efficacy in taking out grease, in washing linen, &c.; for potash combines readily with oil or fat, with which it forms a compound well known to you under the name of soap.
CAROLINE.
Really! Then I should think it would be better to wash all linen with pearlash than with soap, as, in the latter case, the alkali being already combined with oil, must be less efficacious in extracting grease.
MRS. B.
Its effect would be too powerful on fine linen, and would injure its texture; pearlash is therefore only used for that which is of a strong coarse kind. For the same reason you cannot wash your hands with plain potash; but, when mixed with oil in the form of soap, it is soft as well as cleansing, and is therefore much better adapted to the purpose.
Caustic potash, as we already observed, acts on the skin, and animal fibre, in virtue of its attraction for water and oil, and converts all animal matter into a kind of saponaceous jelly.
EMILY.
Are vegetables the only source from which potash can be derived?
MRS. B.
No: for though far most abundant in vegetables, it is by no means confined to that class of bodies, being found also on the surface of the earth, mixed with various minerals, especially with earths and stones, whence it is supposed to be conveyed into vegetables by the roots of the plant. It is also met with, though in very small quantities, in some animal substances. The most common state of potash is that of carbonat; I suppose you understand what that is?
EMILY.
I believe so; though I do not recollect that you ever mentioned the word before. If I am not mistaken, it must be a compound salt, formed by the union of carbonic acid with potash.
MRS. B.
Very true; you see how admirably the nomenclature of modern chemistry is adapted to assist the memory; when you hear the name of a compound, you necessarily learn what are its constituent parts; and when you are acquainted with these constituents, you can immediately name the compound which they form.
CAROLINE.
Pray, how were bodies arranged and distinguished before this nomenclature was introduced?
MRS. B.
Chemistry was then a much more difficult study; for every substance had an arbitrary name, which it derived either from the person who discovered it, as Glauber's salts for instance; or from some other circumstance relative to it, though quite unconnected with its real nature, as potash.
These names have been retained for some of the simple bodies; for as this class is not numerous, and therefore can easily be remembered, it has not been thought necessary to change them.
EMILY.
Yet I think it would have rendered the new nomenclature more complete to have methodised the names of the elementary, as well as of the compound bodies, though it could not have been done in the same manner. But the names of the simple substances might have indicated their nature, or, at least, some of their principal properties; and if, like the acids and compound salts, all the simple bodies had a similar termination, they would have been immediately known as such. So complete and regular a nomenclature would, I think, have given a clearer and more comprehensive view of chemistry than the present, which is a medley of the old and new terms. |
|